Indeed, while I can look at amazement at what US industry was able to produce for the war effort I am equally amazed that the British to have produced what they did when their factories were being targetted and bombed by the Luftwaffe for several years during the war. British production pales in comparison with that of the US, but to have still produced so much as the British did is just as deserving of being trumpetted as the US.westwoody said:
Is America becoming a fascist state?
- Thread starter Bull
- Start date
We're engaged in pure speculation. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the war was over, every city in Japan levelled, not much need for ramping up production of nuclear weapons.dirtydan said:
Instead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, maybe it would have been Berlin and Frankfurt. The Germans would have caved, no one would have gambled on what America's nuclear production capacity might be.
Frankly, you are simply begging the question now. You keep saying that Germany would have won because it would have won. Even I have conceded that we are speculating about an alternative history which never happened. You haven't given a plausible explanation for how a much smaller country such as Germany, with far fewer people, resources, and industrial capacity could have defeated the US. We did, after all, destroy their infrastructure rather thoroughly and rather easily. The only thing certain was that they were on their way to victory over the Allies before the US joined the war.
On your fist point, CBC has some excellent programming beyond hockey. Air Farce and This Hour has 22 Minutes are classic, and the Passionate Eye is great. I just watched 'Shake Hands with the Devil' on the Passionate Eye about Romeo Dallaire's return to Rwanda ten years after watching the genocide. Good documentary, hard hitting stuff.ThighMan said:
As for CTV and Global having better news than the CBC, that's just plain laughable.
It was far from certain that the Axis was on their way to victory before the US entered the war. They had already lost the Battle of Britain and were becoming overextended by their invasion of the Soviet Union. By the way, the use of atomic bombs against Japan had more to do with scaring the USSR than beating Japan. They would not have been used against Germany for the simple reasons that they had already surrendered months earlier and that the American population would not have stomached their use against a white, European nation, even if it was the Nazis.rollerboy said:
Like, I said, we're just writing up ideas for Twilight Zone episodes. I didn't say that it was certain that the Axis would win, I said it was certain that it "looked like" the Axis was on its way to victory. Things looked grim. The Battle of Britain was a critical victory, but it was also a little like saving match point against an opponent who's up two sets and 5-0 in the third.BushPilot said:
I know that Germany had earlier surrendered, we were indulging Dan's hypothesis of Teutonic invincibility.
i will give the US so ...
Heres a few fact that some so called arm chair WW2 war historians for get ... Nazi Germany was working on an A bomb... they produced heavy water in Norway to be used in a reactor to get inriched plutonium for the A bomb( so they had an atomic reactor some where) They also had rockets and prototype of sub launched rockets,and a long range missil on the drawing board ,,which would reach New York.( The US did not have major rocket success untill it got repatriated german rocket sic.)
Could they have succeaded who know ..they did not .. Why ? ..Partly because of allied bombing that destroyed the infrastructure to build the parts ..and partly because the german people themselves that stated to sabatage the system .. The jewish scientised ( yes jewish ) That worked on the A bomb did not want it to succead,,,,, and the slave labour started to slow things down to.. There was a lot more going on in WW2 then what you guys have been blabing about here ..And it was all to defeat fascists'.... How little they new ..that it allways rears it's ugly head.
Yes I think the US made a differance because they could have been next iof they were to slow in acting.( Don't beleave the shit told by one side ..look around get all side good and bad ..then make your own oppinion..thats one right on freedom of thought.
Heres a few fact that some so called arm chair WW2 war historians for get ... Nazi Germany was working on an A bomb... they produced heavy water in Norway to be used in a reactor to get inriched plutonium for the A bomb( so they had an atomic reactor some where) They also had rockets and prototype of sub launched rockets,and a long range missil on the drawing board ,,which would reach New York.( The US did not have major rocket success untill it got repatriated german rocket sic.)
Could they have succeaded who know ..they did not .. Why ? ..Partly because of allied bombing that destroyed the infrastructure to build the parts ..and partly because the german people themselves that stated to sabatage the system .. The jewish scientised ( yes jewish ) That worked on the A bomb did not want it to succead,,,,, and the slave labour started to slow things down to.. There was a lot more going on in WW2 then what you guys have been blabing about here ..And it was all to defeat fascists'.... How little they new ..that it allways rears it's ugly head.
Yes I think the US made a differance because they could have been next iof they were to slow in acting.( Don't beleave the shit told by one side ..look around get all side good and bad ..then make your own oppinion..thats one right on freedom of thought.
Yup, it's all "woulda, coulda, shoulda.."
I know the Germans had an A-bomb program, headed by Heisenberg. He claimed after the war that he had been sandbagging to keep the Nazis from gaining such a terrible weapon. Most dismissed this claim. But the fact is, they didn't manage to produce a weapon, and lacked the airpower to deliver it effectively to the US. Maybe a few Hail Mary V-2's against Britain or Russia, but an accurate ICBM in 1945? Doubtful.
The war really wasn't that close. American life was disrupted, but nothing like pretty much everywhere in Europe except the neutral countries. Europe was devastated. America still had plenty of capacity left to crank it up. The Germans could through everything they had into military production, and still not match US output, while simultaneously starving their deteriorating economic base.
I know the Germans had an A-bomb program, headed by Heisenberg. He claimed after the war that he had been sandbagging to keep the Nazis from gaining such a terrible weapon. Most dismissed this claim. But the fact is, they didn't manage to produce a weapon, and lacked the airpower to deliver it effectively to the US. Maybe a few Hail Mary V-2's against Britain or Russia, but an accurate ICBM in 1945? Doubtful.
The war really wasn't that close. American life was disrupted, but nothing like pretty much everywhere in Europe except the neutral countries. Europe was devastated. America still had plenty of capacity left to crank it up. The Germans could through everything they had into military production, and still not match US output, while simultaneously starving their deteriorating economic base.
hale
i am happy to see that rollerboy is well read .. better then i ... but is is refreshing to once again visit our youth when we debated with our elders about thing we had not exsperianced and new even less about ...but that is how we grow..... Now how did this get all started on the perb board ...is this not about love ...or at least f*** ..not war.
i am happy to see that rollerboy is well read .. better then i ... but is is refreshing to once again visit our youth when we debated with our elders about thing we had not exsperianced and new even less about ...but that is how we grow..... Now how did this get all started on the perb board ...is this not about love ...or at least f*** ..not war.
Hear! Hear! Beats me, politics over pussy, I think not.maxx50 said:Now how did this get all started on the perb board ...is this not about love ...or at least f*** ..not war.
Even us fascists need lovin'.
No points for "almost winning" a war. Especially when you return home with fewer than 2% of the soldiers who set out on the campaign. Ouch!qwerty said:
BP - you forgot "The Beachcombers". That was my favorite show for a long time. For a low budget show they did a great job.BushPilot said:
I never did like the CBC news. They thought Canada started and ended with the boarders of Ontario and Quebec. For a government funded network, you think they would have at least taken a broad view of the country.
For some reason we can get CTV down here, but not CBC so my opinion is dated by at least 12 years, but I always felt they were a very left leaning news organization. At the time so was every other network, it has only been recently we have watch the more right leaning networks take root.
It should be no surprise to anyone that FOX is doing so well. Half the US population is conservative. So if 3 cable news networks appeal to liberal audience they get to divide 50% between them and FOX gets the other 50% to themselves. DUH.
Beachcombers!?! What, do I look like I'm a hundred years old! LOL Seriously, I never watched 'the Beachcombers' as I was just a wee lad when it went off the air. I do remember Jackson Davies pimping all sorts of products on TV for years afterwards, though. And I think I remember when Bruno Gerussi died.
I did not know how old you were, but the show went off the air in 1990 so that would make you in your early 20's if you were a wee lad then.BushPilot said:
I think Jackson Davies was the RCMP officer and he did all kinds of ads, the one for Carter Pontiac is what I remeber. The guy who played Relic also did work around town for a while. I think he was in a few plays.
Well, 'the Beachcombers' had a good run. That's rare for Canadian productions. Although there seems to be a revival in Canadian TV productions. 'Corner Gas' and 'Trailer Park Boys' have been getting great reviews. Apparently they are much better than such Canadian TV luminaries as 'Street Legal'.
